logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.12.17 2015노3747
모욕
Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

The above fines are imposed by the Defendants.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the process and frequency of the Defendants’ participation in the instant assembly, the meaning and overall context of the speech, place where the speech was made, and circumstances before and after the speech, etc., the expressions or remarks, such as “Nara’s E-mail, national outflow E-, and “E,” etc., recorded on banner at the time of the instant assembly, cannot be objectively deemed as an insulting speech that may objectively undermine the social assessment of the victim’s personal value, and even if such an act constitutes an insulting speech, it constitutes a legitimate act permissible under the social norms.

B. The lower court’s sentence (fine 2,000,000) imposed on the Defendants is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination of the misapprehension of the legal doctrine as to the assertion of insult as stated in the crime of insult is an expression of abstract judgment or sacrific sentiment that could undermine people’s social evaluation without mentioning the facts. In this case, the expressions or remarks made by the Defendants, such as “Sara’s E” and “E,” written in a banner, are not merely an exceptional and indecent expression in light of the general and ordinary meaning, but also constitutes an insulting speech that could undermine the social evaluation of the victim’s personal value, an artist widely known to the public. (2) Meanwhile, according to the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, D filed a lawsuit against F, claiming damages against the lower court, and was sentenced to dismissal of the claim on July 26, 2013, and at the time of the instant case, it can be known that the trial was in progress in the appellate court.

The victim is not the direct party of the dispute, but the relationship between the victim and the F corporation in the above trial process was not a major issue.

arrow